Syria, you're next!!

[piece-it pete]

It appears that our intellegence community believes most of the WMD went to Syria. Sidenote to doubters that don't believe it even existed: there is no doubt Hobobum had TONS of un-accounted-for WMD. Even the UN agrees.

We get one shred of a hint from the butcher (who already slipped up - some of his minions were picked up almost immediately after his capture - atributed to him) & Syria is in a world of - bad stuff. Peace at any pricers, be prepared!!

We have certainly started our psychological torture of the rat already (I'm sure that is the right word: you pick:). His (even "accidental") info could have *huge* repercussions.

Conjuncture:

1)Syria
2)Al Qida
3)Saudi Arabia
4)Pakistan!

And possibly a pile of names from the past: Lybia, Cuba, many others, and jeez-I-hope-not North Korea.

Gird your loins, boys! It's ass-wuppin' time! "If you are not with us, you are against us" (GWB) - cough up the WMD, or who you sold it to, or else!

Pete

PS Osama yo Momma - you're next!!

[woodman]

What a load of crap, pete! No wonder you support Dubya - the chimp ... you think just like him. You evidently are completely oblivious to the fact that this idiot has single-handedly (in the space of only a couple of years) totally destroyed any respect we had from the rest of the planet!

Until we can replace the ignorant sonuva***** with someone with a semblance of intelligence, I'm seriously worried about this country of ours. It's precisely the "ass-whuppin'" attitude that has put us where we are today, and that definitely ain't good - in spite of what YOU think.

[JSE]

I'm not saying we need to go kick everyone's butt, but I do think we need to STOP worrying about what other countries think. We are the SuperPower in this world and we should not be afraid to flex our muscle every now and then.

" You evidently are completely oblivious to the fact that this idiot has single-handedly (in the space of only a couple of years) totally destroyed any respect we had from the rest of the planet!"

If anything, I think "the planet" respects us more. Yes, France, Germany and Russia think we suck. Screw Them! Who cares what they think. Oh no, they don't like us. Boo Freakin Hooo! They are not the World, contrary to what some liberals want you to think.

And, GW is not an idiot. He's got some huge ones. I admire the guy. Do I agree with everything he does, no. But, he does something! He has not sat on his ass like our last President did. I love how the Bush haters simply hate him no matter what. He could end world hunger and bring peace and you people would still hate him for something because he "stole" the election. Come up with something besides "GW is an idiot". Haven't heard that before. Very original!

It's like being a parent. Your kids don't always like the rules and standards you hold them to. But when they grow up, they understand and respect you. That's your job as a parent. It's not a popularity contest. Some countries will like us, some will hate us. But, if they are in trouble, they will always come to us first. It's a thankless job, and GW is doing in right for a change. I truly think he is not trying to win a popularity contest but doing what he thinks is right. Can you say that about any of the current liberal candidates? Maybe one or two, and it's not the front runners.


JSE

[karl k]

about holding the world to your standard as they might require you to adhere to theirs someday.

We're already beginning to see this at the UN level(which I might add we helped to create) and elsewhere in such cases as the Kyoto Treaty, the ABM Treaty, and War Crimes Tribunals(remember the EU and others wanted to hold leaders ie. Bush and Rumsfeld responsible for war even if they had cause and won). Are we willing to give up OUR WMD's and research in an effort to hold to the same standard as we hold others to? Are we willing to go through an invasion if we don't comply? Are we willing to submit to UN inspections and are we willing to comply 100% with UN resolutions that we don't agree with? And if not, who will be the bad guys? Will the British be to us as the French were to Iraq? You know, your implying that after we squash a few countries, the rest will fall in line. You site that all civilizations throughout history had fallen due to the degradation of the family... well let me tell you what, there are plenty of instances in history where a civilization had tried to make others fall into line and ultimately, after reaching a size they could no longer control, the population rebelled and toppeled the government. It reminds me alot of Rome...(in the old days) Enjoy your victories while you can... Your just giving the "triggerman" that much more justification to use one of those WMD's on us.

[piece-it pete]

about holding the world to your standard as they might require you to adhere to theirs someday.

We're already beginning to see this at the UN level(which I might add we helped to create) and elsewhere in such cases as the Kyoto Treaty, the ABM Treaty, and War Crimes Tribunals(remember the EU and others wanted to hold leaders ie. Bush and Rumsfeld responsible for war even if they had cause and won). Are we willing to give up OUR WMD's and research in an effort to hold to the same standard as we hold others to? Are we willing to go through an invasion if we don't comply? Are we willing to submit to UN inspections and are we willing to comply 100% with UN resolutions that we don't agree with? And if not, who will be the bad guys? Will the British be to us as the French were to Iraq? You know, your implying that after we squash a few countries, the rest will fall in line. You site that all civilizations throughout history had fallen due to the degradation of the family... well let me tell you what, there are plenty of instances in history where a civilization had tried to make others fall into line and ultimately, after reaching a size they could no longer control, the population rebelled and toppeled the government. It reminds me alot of Rome...(in the old days) Enjoy your victories while you can... Your just giving the "triggerman" that much more justification to use one of those WMD's on us.

The difference between, say, China & Sudan is responsibility & verification. We believe China (or any other gov't we deem responsible) will not sell or give tech support to those people whose aim is to bring down the rule of law worldwide for their own purposes.

The War Crimes "court" would have been/is controlled by peace-at-any-pricers - ANY action would be criminal. Kyoto would make a lot more sense if the decision making authority were scientists, not bureaucrats.

Speaking of bureaucrats: the UN stopped having any real meaning once it became clear that it functions as the rule of the least competent member. Would you willingly give control of our country to that (mostly appointed reps by dictators) body?

How many voters would that dis-enfranchise?

And I don't care if those nattering ninnies resent our power - for the forseeable future there's not one darn thing they can do about it. Not being hard - just stating facts.

You are absolutely right - empires rise and fall. We have so far resisted the temptation of empire, and Iraq is no exception. We will give their country back & pay for their oil (opposed to raping their country & taking their oil), after we kill the peoples' enemies & rebuild their country, with our own blood & money. This isn't the first time (Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Phillippines, Kuwait, etc) and certainly won't be the last. This seperates us from all empires in known history. If we are in fact an "economic" empire then it is something new under the sun, an Empire that succeeds by lifting people up rather than holding them down. The world will be a worse place when our sun sets.

Many others know this. This is why we have broad international support.

Rereading my original post, I see it appears somewhat jingoistic. Understand, I believe war is a horrible thing & should not be taken lightly. I sincerely hope we don't have to invade anybody! But in a cold, hard world that hope is unrealistic. So we should present a united front to our enemies, in the more realistic hope they will back down in the face of overwhelming force.

Nowadays, facing these realities means it's our fault they killed 3000+ civilians already - and that it'll be our fault when they try (succeed, eventually) again. If a bully punches you when you refuse to hand over your lunch money it's your fault for standing up to him! Those poor, misunderstood terrorists. Of course it's not THEIR fault.

Pete

[karl k]

who's the bully? What's the lunch money represent? It's all a matter of who's eye's you're looking through.

Look at the opinions of those countries we have helped and look at what we did to them afterwards. Twisting of arms in efforts to gain support for our causes, raping the citizens, placing excessive tarrifs on imports, using up the worlds supply of oil while we wait to sell ours to our friends at a substancial mark-up after the worlds runs out, acting like the bullys they claim we are. Sure the governments are supportive, but only because they have to be to remain in power. Other wise, we might go in and remove the old and replace with someone that's to our liking. When you want to know if we have real support, look at the populas. Even our so called allies, have vast populations that don't like us. We may say we're doing the right thing, but in the end, it's all about whose side of the fence are you looking from.

[piece-it pete]

who's the bully? What's the lunch money represent? It's all a matter of who's eye's you're looking through.

Look at the opinions of those countries we have helped and look at what we did to them afterwards. Twisting of arms in efforts to gain support for our causes, raping the citizens, placing excessive tarrifs on imports, using up the worlds supply of oil while we wait to sell ours to our friends at a substancial mark-up after the worlds runs out, acting like the bullys they claim we are. Sure the governments are supportive, but only because they have to be to remain in power. Other wise, we might go in and remove the old and replace with someone that's to our liking. When you want to know if we have real support, look at the populas. Even our so called allies, have vast populations that don't like us. We may say we're doing the right thing, but in the end, it's all about whose side of the fence are you looking from.

You don't like America very much, do you?

A couple of things:

1) The economic system (and troops committed worldwide to stabilise regions) we built & continue to run (with our blood & money) has kept *millions and millions* alive - rich & poor. More than alive. It doesn't matter if these people have been trained since birth to blame us. And if they do, that's their problem. The only way to keep people from blaming us is to withdraw & become poor . Do you think this is the right course of action? If not, what do you suggest?

2) Are you for drilling in Alaska? If I recall, we attemped to do so and were shut down by the kind people opposing the current conflict. What kind of car do you drive?

3) Just who are we raping? And what did we do to them afterwards?

4) Tariffs - what about steel? What about the "giant sucking sound"?

5) Arm-twisting has another name - diplomacy.

Pete

PS I don't really believe you are anti-American ;).

[JSE]

Karl,

"but in the end, it's all about whose side of the fence are you looking from."

Uh, I'm looking from our side of the fence. Who's side are you looking from?

Why are you so afraid of what others think? What are you afraid of?

What do you want our Country to do? Bow down to everyone else so we can feel good about ourselves? I for one feel pretty good about my country. Do you have any idea how much foreign aid we give out, how much food, money, etc. It's hundred of times more than any other country. I don't see France, Germany, Saudia, Iran, Syria or others going out and helping the the less fortunate. We help others, why should'nt we expect a little respect in exchange.

"Sure the governments are supportive, but only because they have to be to remain in power. Other wise, we might go in and remove the old and replace with someone that's to our liking."

Yeh, I heard we are getting ready to overthrow France! They better start liking us or else! Germany? Are you guys listening? The fact that you make such a statement really shows you have a completely naive and uniformed notion of how this nation conducts it's business.

I guess people like yourself would just assume our nation keep to itself and ignore everyone else. That way we don't offend anyone. And that what it's all about anyway. Being everyone's friend and being loved. Ahhhhhhhhhh.

Just think, I thought we needed to watch out for ourselves and others is some cases. That crazy Suddam, just ignore him. We really should not bud in. Sure he's killing hundreds of thousands of his own people, but we don't want to offend. What would some other countries think?

Me personally, I would rather go stomp out terrosim now on our terms than let terrorist hit us again and again. Because if we don't, they will keep hitting us. Minding our own business won't make it go away. They don't think we should exist on this earth. I am not going anywhere soon, are you?

Here I provided a link that may help you.

http://www.frenchconnections.co.uk/realestate/

JSE

[karl k]

You don't like America very much, do you?

A couple of things:

1) The economic system (and troops committed worldwide to stabilise regions) we built & continue to run (with our blood & money) has kept *millions and millions* alive - rich & poor. More than alive. It doesn't matter if these people have been trained since birth to blame us. And if they do, that's their problem. The only way to keep people from blaming us is to withdraw & become poor . Do you think this is the right course of action? If not, what do you suggest?

2) Are you for drilling in Alaska? If I recall, we attemped to do so and were shut down by the kind people opposing the current conflict. What kind of car do you drive?

3) Just who are we raping? And what did we do to them afterwards?

4) Tariffs - what about steel? What about the "giant sucking sound"?

5) Arm-twisting has another name - diplomacy.

Pete

PS I don't really believe you are anti-American .

1) Yes, no one can deny the fact that of all the countries in the world, WE are the ones that give the most in all forms of aid... including military. Interesting isn't it? So it must not be our giving nature that causes us so much grief. Must be something else like envy, jellousy(sp?), or our unbridelled nack for humillity. I would not suggest that we become poor but I would suggest that some form of correction is in order. You see, inherently getting involved does have some nasty side effects and it is that which we are having to deal with. I can't tell you what the world would be like if we didn't prop up the Saudi's or lend military aid to Iraq durring the Iraq/Iran war, but I believe it does warrent some thought. Withdraw? Not all out, but I do think better discression is in order. Sure we may have made life better for alot of people, but look at all those we haven't helped for lack of national benefit. I realize we are going to make mistakes when getting involved, but maybe we can take a more long term look at the repercussions of getting involved as opposed to just looking to put out the next biggest fire. Sometimes you just have to let a fire burn itself out before you can begin picking up the pieces. As far as those who have been brought up hating us, IT IS OUR PROBLEM! Some believe that killing them or their families in a war/conflict will bring the rest around but I maintain that it doesn't always work and since violence breeds violence, it can be counterproductive.

2) You bet! I'm also for alternative fuel sources and conservation. This is part of what I'm getting at. I believe we are and have been heading in the WRONG direction with our energy policy and it is part of the reason for the hatred we see towards us. If we decided 30yrs ago to concentrate our efforts to self sufficiency instead of bargaining with others, we might have made a very different world and the Saudi's, Iraq, and the rest of OPEC would be with alot less power and influence. We wouldn't feel so obligated to "stabilize" the region in the name of national security and we wouldn't have to drill in Alaska. Isn't it amazing we have the ability to make computers that do all that they do but even with them, we still cannot make a car that can economically run on anything other than oil and still retain it's performance?

BTW... I drive a Honda most of the time, and a Chevy truck for hauling things(1000miles/yr) Another side note... Remember the tarrifs on imports from Japan over the yrs? Gee how it was sooo unfair that Americans weren't buying American cars in the 80's so lets make it so Japanese cars are so expensive to buy that we will think twice about buying them. I bought a Honda not for the fuel economy... but the durability. I was glad to see we finally got the message and now our cars are what they should be.

3) I was not using the term metaphorically but literally. I was in reference to our friends in Japan and Philippines that had accused some of our troops of raping some of the younger female citizens in those countries. There maybe some other instances I'm not familiar with but I was siting those as another form of Americans being accused of taking advantage of someone elses hospitality. Afterwards they asked us to leave, and I think we actually did, but the scar remains. Lesson... Sometimes when someone asks to be left alone, you become a better friend longterm. When they ask for help, be the first one there and do all you can without making things worse. Do you recall what the verdict was for the accused? Was the punishment fair if found guilty? Did we do them right by our actions or did we sweep it under the rug?

4) What about steel? Somebody had to have a reason for buying overseas steel, and somebody had to have a reason for not being more competative in the market. It seems to me that the one who refused to be more competative has got nothing more to say about how fair business should be conducted. How does inducing tarrifs because of our short sightedness strengthen our position with those people(not governments) we do business? I'm sure they feel like they are being "marked".

5) Arm twisting also has yet another name... extorsion.

Pete, I'm not here to bash on America, after all I've got to like it enough to live here! All I am here for is to make people think in a different way before jump to conclusions and support a decision that may not be in our interest. While we as a country do alot of good things, people generally remember the bad things and it is the bad things we should make right to gain their support. I just would like to see America be respected for the respect we give to others and not feared for the size and sophistication of our military.

Drinks are on me Pete... You've certainly earned my respect!

[bturk667]

How have you been?

Question: If the WMD were in Syria, then was our attack with Iraq justified? That was the biggest part of the Bush administrations argument for war with Iraq, no?

Also, what the hell is our intelligence community doing. Do we or don't we know and where the WMD are? Don't forget about the three billion dollars that Saddam supposedly gave to the Syrians!

Well, what about Iran, or how about Saudia Arabia? Let us not forget about them. Hey, what about Yemen. Wasn't the Al Qaeda leader that we suspect as the master mind behind the bombing of the U.S.S Cole found there? Remember what Bush said about harboring and aiding terrorists. Now we have a link between Yemen and Al Qaeda. Maybe they should be next.

Which country now posses the biggest threat to us? Using terrorism as the bases for all military actions! My choice SAUDI ARABIA!!! How many of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi citizens? If that is not a link to the Al Qaeda, then what is? Oh yeah, were is Osama bin Laden from? That's an even better link isn't it? Does any body think that Bush would ever go to war with the Saudis? Hey, didn't the Saudi Royal family vacation at Bush's Texas ranch last year? Talk about being both hypocritical and a liar! Again, remember all that talk about harboring and aiding terrorists! It seems to me you can't have it both ways.

Do you feel safer now that Saddam has been captured? I for one, never felt in danger from Saddam or Iraq! Now, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Palestine and N. Korea, well they a whole different matter altogether!

To me the scariest thing is that Bush and his administration are the ones making the choice on who's next! Is the right choice going to the right and just one? Using Iraq as the template, I'd have to say NO!

[piece-it pete]

How have you been?

Question: If the WMD were in Syria, then was our attack with Iraq justified? That was the biggest part of the Bush administrations argument for war with Iraq, no?

Also, what the hell is our intelligence community doing. Do we or don't we know and where the WMD are? Don't forget about the three billion dollars that Saddam supposedly gave to the Syrians!

Well, what about Iran, or how about Saudia Arabia? Let us not forget about them. Hey, what about Yemen. Wasn't the Al Qaeda leader that we suspect as the master mind behind the bombing of the U.S.S Cole found there? Remember what Bush said about harboring and aiding terrorists. Now we have a link between Yemen and Al Qaeda. Maybe they should be next.

Which country now posses the biggest threat to us? Using terrorism as the bases for all military actions! My choice SAUDI ARABIA!!! How many of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi citizens? If that is not a link to the Al Qaeda, then what is? Oh yeah, were is Osama bin Laden from? That's an even better link isn't it? Does any body think that Bush would ever go to war with the Saudis? Hey, didn't the Saudi Royal family vacation at Bush's Texas ranch last year? Talk about being both hypocritical and a liar! Again, remember all that talk about harboring and aiding terrorists! It seems to me you can't have it both ways.

Do you feel safer now that Saddam has been captured? I for one, never felt in danger from Saddam or Iraq! Now, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Palestine and N. Korea, well they a whole different matter altogether!

To me the scariest thing is that Bush and his administration are the ones making the choice on who's next! Is the right choice going to the right and just one? Using Iraq as the template, I'd have to say NO!

Oh pretty good. And you :)?

The current belief is that Saddam moved his stash to Syria before the start of the war.

Many of the issues you bring up come down to this: we prefer open diplomacy & behind the scenes armtwisting to outright invasion. Some of our calls will be good. Some will be bad. People will die, right or wrong.

I believe Bush is doing very well. You don't, and that's OK with me. Heck, it's still a free country! But don't think for a minute that Bush is actually stupid. I didn't like Clinton (understatement:) but never thought he wasn't smart. No matter what people say, you've got to be smart & driven to win the presidency. It is not hereditary and can't really be bought (yet).

And there is SO much we don't know. For instance, GWBs' warning to Taiwan last week. It was definitely part of a deal with China. What deal? China announced some money reforms afterward but that certainly isn't ALL of it - it is probably just the tip (I would expect N Koreas' name came up).

So goes the war on terror. We have no real idea what's really going on and most of our discussion is pure conjucture. We won't know for some time if Bush is right or wrong.

But some things are known. Take Saudi Arabia. On the face of it we should probably nuke them. But the gov't appears to be serious about controlling these elements now. Keep in mind that one of Osamas' aims is to bring down the house of Saud. If we can help them help themselves then we don't have the nightmare of invading them. We invade Saudi Arabia, and the middle east (and large pieces of southest asia) go up in flames. If it were neccessary we'd do it. I pray we don't have to.

We've dealt with Syria before. I believe they'll crack. But what do I know?

Iran. One of the little known bits about 9-11 is that there was a pro-USA rally in the middle east after the news spead. It happened in Tehran. I never would have believed it, living through the hostage years, but we have real friends inside Iran who aren't afraid of their ruling Imams. There appears to be a chance Iran will follow Iraq as a democracy. I hope so. When I heard about the rally I was floored!! I want them to succeed, and am sure they are receiving huge amounts of covert aid from us.

We are probably already in control of Yemen (and Sudan) for all intents & purposes. Palastine is too small & already contained by an ally - not a threat to the US.

China will not allow N. Korea to go too far (I believe). They use the Koreans to embarress us politically. They're doing a pretty good job.

So there you go - my .02 and then some!!

Pete

PS - I do believe that we're winning both the fight & some hearts (Iraqis & Afgans) - and that the end result is almost inevitable - the death of Osama & the containment of Al-Quida & their ilk.

[bturk667]

I really doubt if we'll do anything to Syria. But, hell what do I know! I just hope the unrest in Iraq gets quelled soon. Too many troops are getting wounded and or killed!

I just want to know how the intelligent(I use this term very, very, loosely) George W. Bush and his administration could enter a war without an exit strategy!

[piece-it pete]

Any loss of life is regrettable. But our count is very, very low & must amaze most of the world.

After 9/11, we had to act! I assure you we had no exit strategy when we went into ww2, even though we had years of warning, and the task was MUCH larger. (We had years of warning with Osama, too, and the smoking gun [Cole] but the Left Wing Hero was too busy with Chinese campaign money, pie-in-the-sky peace deals, pork bellies, perjury & reading polls to deal with it. Notice I'm not insulting his intellegence:)

The good news: We have one, but we can't say it publicly. It is (drum roll please):

After a few (5-10?) years, if the Iraqis haven't been able to govern themselves, we'll pack up & leave, maybe keep a secure base here or there.

If they are stable, then we'll station troops as long as they wish, al'a Germany & Japan.

Pete

[bturk667]

Your comparing apples and oranges when your compare W.W. II, to that of our war with Iraq. How come you didn't mention Korea or Vietman? Those seem to be much more similar to what we are going through in Iraq. Oh yeah, how are those two going. How long have we been in both those countries. Now those are some good exit strageties!

The good news: We have one, but we can't say it publicly. It is (drum roll please):

After a few (5-10?) years, if the Iraqis haven't been able to govern themselves, we'll pack up & leave, maybe keep a secure base here or there.

A few years= 5-10!?! Man Pete, what do you consider many years. I got it, 50 years. Say, isn't that about the amount of time we have been in S. Korea? I see your point. O.K., not really.


If they are stable, then we'll station troops as long as they wish, al'a Germany & Japan.

Right, I see the similarities between Japan and Germany, and that of Iraq. Again youre comparing totally different cultures, ideals, and religious beliefs! Apples and Oranges! There is nothing in our histroy that is the same as the undertaking we are attempting. We, I believe, are in for some serious trouble.
Lastly, I'm sure the Iraqi people would like nothing more than to have U.S. troops in their country, not to mention the rest of the Middle East! Happy days if your in the U.S. military.

Pete[/QUOTE]